This is the greatest destruction of individual liberty since Dred Scott. This is the end of America as we know it. No exaggeration.

— benshapiro (@benshapiro) June 28, 2012

2. Wait Until They Discover That They Use the Metric System

BuzzFeed found a bunch of conservatives so freaked out by this tyranny that they're throwing in the towel and heading north to that right-wing paradise known as Canada – a place that has both universal healthcare and gay marriage...

In a closed door House GOP meeting Thursday, Indiana congressman and gubernatorial candidate Mike Pence likened the Supreme Court's ruling upholding the Democratic health care law to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, according to several sources present.

He immediately apologized.

4. Grab Your Musket and Tri-Corner Hat!

Did you know that the Founding Fathers fought a revolution to keep people uninsured. It's true!

Wonkette:

Now that poors can get health insurance because the demon Supreme Court sided with that commie muslin NOBAMA fella, the only way to defend our freedom is armed insurrection! Mount up and ride to the sound of the gun says former Michigan Republican Party spokesman Matthew Davis.

Matthew Davis, an attorney in Lansing, sent the email moments after the Supreme Court ruling to numerous new media outlets and limited government activists with the headline: “Is Armed Rebellion Now Justified?”

“There are times government has to do things to get what it wants and holds a gun to your head,” Davis said. “I’m saying at some point, we have to ask the question when do we turn that gun around and say no and resist.

The Kentucky Republican belittled the high court’s health care decision as the flawed opinion of just a “couple people.”

“Just because a couple people on the Supreme Court declare something to be ‘constitutional’ does not make it so. The whole thing remains unconstitutional,” the freshman lawmaker said in a statement.

7. Health Insurance Is Exactly Like Slavery

It's not just Ben Shapiro – Richard Viguerie, a stalwart of the conservative movement since the Goldwater days, also reminisced about Dred Scott.

Today, a 5-4 majority of the Supreme Court of the United States – the body the Framers of the Constitution created to protect the citizenry from tyranny – has chosen to join infamous courts of the past, such as the Taney Court that made the Dred Scott v. Sanford decision finding that slaves had no rights and the Fuller Court that ruled to institutionalize Jim Crow discrimination in Plessy v. Ferguson in stripping Americans of their freedom.

8. You Wouldn't Like Me When I'm Angry

An unspoken virtue of Obamacare is that it might just make Glenn Beck's head explode. From his site, The Blaze:

Needless to say, the news [of the ruling] went over like a lead balloon with Glenn Beck and his radio co-hosts Pat and Stu — so much so that they nearly violated FCC language requirements.

When Beck and his team found out that it was in fact Roberts’ decision that pushed the bill through, they were visibly and audibly stunned. Beck surmised that the reason for Roberts’ decision likely hinges on the pervasive nature of progressivism.

“Progressivism is a disease and it is in both parties” Beck said.

“Progressives are fascists.”

Beck, looking on the one positive he feels to have come from this decision, said that the “Lord works in mysterious ways.”

OK, Glenn Beck.

9. John Roberts: Traitor!

Every fundamentalist religion abhors apostates, and American conservatism is no exception. As Alex Seitz-Wald detailed in Salon, the Chief Justice was treated to an abundance of bile.

“It’s patently absurd,” seethed Seton Motley, a conservative activist with LessGovernment.org. “This is the umpire calling the game for the first five innings, and then putting on a cap and glove and play first base...

“I have a message for Chief Justice Roberts,” Dean Clancy of the Tea Party group Freedomworks declared over the loudspeaker after the ruling came down. “The power to tax is the power to destroy”...

Bryan Fischer, the prominent Christian-right activist, toldBuzzFeed’s Rosie Gray that Roberts “is going down in history as the justice that shredded the Constitution and turned it into a worthless piece of parchment”

10. Or Is He?

Unlike most constitutional experts, some conservative bloggers thought that the law was so obviously unconstitutional that something fishy must be going on...

Someone got to Roberts. I bet they got to him and told him he has to vote this way or members of his family – kids, wife, parents, whoever – were going to be killed.

Later this afternoon, it’s going to come out that Roberts was coerced. ... the whole story will come out, Roberts will issue his REAL opinion, and Obama and Axelrod will be taken away in handcuffs.

"Responding to a caller who asked him where he would go for health care if Congress enacts reform, Limbaugh replied,

I don't know. I'll just tell you this, if this passes and it's five years from now and all that stuff gets implemented -- I am leaving the country. I'll go to Costa Rica."

Umm, just a teensy little problem there, Rush. Costa Rica has universal health care, one of the best health systems in Latin America. But here's the good news: Afghanistan has NO universal health care. I just know Rush'll LOVE Kabul."

WASHINGTON – Conservative icon Rep. Michele Bachmann called the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the healthcare law the end of economic and religious liberty in America as she rallied disheartened activists.

“We lost religious liberty – that is a fundamental right under the constitution,” she said to a crowd outside the Supreme Court building Thursday. “We lost economic liberty – that is a fundamental right under the constitution. We lost our individual liberty to set our course in this country.”

The 10 Most Hilariously Unhinged Right-Wing Reactions to the Obamacare Ruling:

They are funny ... in a scary sort of way. When you consider the level, and type, of opposition it is something of a miracle that the healthcare reform has passed.

From the OP:

Quote:

The sick and the uninsured. The Affordable Care Act will extend health insurance to some 30 million Americans who currently lack coverage. It will also guarantee the availability of insurance for those with pre-existing conditions and ensure those people don’t pay more than healthy people. Anyone earning up to 133% of the federal poverty level will get free coverage through Medicaid and those earning 133% to 400% (but without access to employer or government insurance) will be eligible for federal subsidies to help them buy policies.

I guess some think Armageddon is here. They'd better pack their knapsacks and head for the hills.

It is kind of odd that a Justice of the Supreme Court can help pass a law and then vote on its constitutionality. Not the first time this has happened, but odd that it is so acceptable. People continue to bicker about side issues.

This is the point where executive powers come in, and even though it has his name, Obama needs to get rid of it. The ruling is tainted. It did come from the Supreme Court, but who checks them? In a court case where a judge has involvement what should happen?

If you want to watch a government that doesn't function, well, America is the cinema. Free medical coverage would be great, but that requires a population that isn't in debt to itself. America is like the stereotype of the guy who wont ask for directions. By the time you ask everyone is already believing you know where you are going.

I have no political affiliation, I am too disgusted. Anytime people get into a political discussion is revolves around what the other side has done, never what is being done.

I know few people from the US I can actually get into a discussion with, hence I am ranting.

I assume you're referring to Justice Kagan - how about Justice Thomas?

"Kagan should sit this one out: The case for Kagan recusing herself from the "ObamaCare" case "would seem to be an open and shut one," says Rick Moran at The American Thinker. When she worked for the Obama administration, she sent an email cheering the news that Democrats had the votes to pass the Affordable Care Act, calling it "simply amazing." But unfortunately, short of a "smoking gun memo" proving that she actually helped craft the administration's legal defense of the law, I expect Kagan to participate in the case next year.
"Kagan emails show she was 'excited' about ObamaCare passage"

Thomas is the one on shaky ethical ground here: If there's an "obvious conflict of interest" in this case, says George Zornick at The Nation, it's in the Thomas household. In 2009, Thomas' wife, Virginia, founded a conservative nonprofit dedicated to fighting Obama's "hard-left agenda." Ms. Thomas continues to agitate for the health care law's repeal, and 74 members of Congress have signed a letter asking Thomas to recuse himself from the case. It's hard to say whether Ms. Thomas's politicking is a cause or symptom of her husband's "deep bias and antipathy towards progressive causes" — but it's also hard to argue there's no conflict here.
"Clarence Thomas vs. legal ethics"

These complaints are pure politics: "I am generally one of the most pro-recusal scholars you can find," James Sample, a professor at the Hofstra University School of Law, tells The Washington Times, "and yet I think in this instance," those trying to push Kagan and Thomas aside are just "opportunists" seeking a political edge. Thomas' "judicial approach is well known" and unlikely to be swayed by his wife's work. And Kagan's "extraordinarily limited exposure to the health care policy" as solicitor general should be "a nonissue."

Quote:
2.The requirement to purchase coverage affects U.S. citizens and U.S. visa holders only if they actually live in the U.S. This is because these individuals are most likely to receive treatment in the U.S. Therefore, actual citizenship does not matter in this mandate. Instead, it is their legal residency that will be considered

Quote:
2.The requirement to purchase coverage affects U.S. citizens and U.S. visa holders only if they actually live in the U.S. This is because these individuals are most likely to receive treatment in the U.S. Therefore, actual citizenship does not matter in this mandate. Instead, it is their legal residency that will be considered

Many of the Americans here have lived abroad for a number of years and fit this description. I wonder what the effect is if you study/work abroad for 6 months to a year? I assume you remain a US resident, file taxes at home but still be required to have coverage from home?

Thomas is the one on shaky ethical ground here: If there's an "obvious conflict of interest" in this case, says George Zornick at The Nation, it's in the Thomas household. In 2009, Thomas' wife, Virginia, founded a conservative nonprofit dedicated to fighting Obama's "hard-left agenda." Ms. Thomas continues to agitate for the health care law's repeal, and 74 members of Congress have signed a letter asking Thomas to recuse himself from the case. It's hard to say whether Ms. Thomas's politicking is a cause or symptom of her husband's "deep bias and antipathy towards progressive causes" — but it's also hard to argue there's no conflict here.
"Clarence Thomas vs. legal ethics"

I heartily disagree holding Sr. Thomas to his wife`s foolishness, nor do I believe any judge should recuse himself from an issue that is actively pursued by his spouse. Despite the union of two unto one which is a marriage, any couple is still responsible for his or her own activities alone. There is no guilt by marital association. The only time it would be an issue is if Srta Thomas owned stock in a medical company whose profitability was threatened by Obamacare.

Would her acting (and being well-paid) as an anti-healthcare reform lobbyist count?

Last week, a meme made its way around the Internet asking why Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas was planning to rule on the healthcare law when his wife, a conservative lobbyist, has made so much money challenging the law.

Now, just days after healthcare law was upheld (with Clarence Thomas dissenting), new financial forms show that Thomas’s wife, Ginni, continued to rake in a profit from opposing healthcare reforms in 2011—even after she previously came under fire for doing so.

According to Thomas’s 2011 financial disclosure report form, filed on May 15 and obtained Friday by Whispers, Ginni Thomas made up to $15,000 working for political lobbying firm Liberty Consulting. The firm lobbied actively against the healthcare law, according to liberal news magazine Mother Jones.

Ginni formed Liberty Consulting after she was criticized for her work at Liberty Central, a non-profit tea party organization that also lobbied against the health care law.

In March of this year, Liberty Central was the subject of a letter sent to the IRS by Common Cause, a nonprofit that works for government accountability. The letter argued that Liberty Central violated the proportionality rule for non-profits because the majority of its activities were designed to help Republican candidates.

Ginni later stepped down from Liberty Central, but her involvement in conservative politics extends beyond these two groups. Among Ginni’s former employers is the Heritage Foundation, another vocal critic of the healthcare law. She also currently works as a “special correspondent” for the conservative website The Daily Caller.

In January 2011, Justice Thomas “inadvertently” left out information about his wife’s employment, including earnings over the past 13 years that added up to as much as $1.6 million.

Thomas himself has also been criticized for his links to the Republican party, most notably in a October 2010 New York Times story about a Republican donors event bankrolled by the conservative Koch brothers, which listed the Supreme Court justice as an attendee."